I just saw this movie today with two friends in their 40s (I am 75). The audience was small and closer to my demographic than to that of my friends.
I agree with much of what you said in your review, especially this insightful remark:
Quote:
A Complete Unknown carries two meanings…
1) The famous lyric that of course doubles as the film's title, one that speaks to Dylan showing up out of nowhere, only to go supernova.
2) And then what the film reveals it's really about; how, after Dylan achieves his stardom, he remains a complete unknown to everyone around him, in that the film is primarily concerned with the effect Dylan's genius leaves on others - the wake of broken hearts and disappointments and envy.
Well said. Dylan as a person and artist is like Moby Dick, whose essential characteristic is that he is unknowable. To some degree, Dylan becomes a blank wall onto which those around him project what they want to see.
The most important projection dealt with in the movie is how the Guthrie/Seeger/Baez Left want Dylan to help them co-opt the very popular and mostly apolitical folk music movement of the late 50s and early 60s and turn it into a political movement that serves their Progressive ends. (One of those ends, the push for Civil Rights, is of course a noble one.)
One cavil I have with the movie is that the filmwriters distort the fact that Guthrie and Seeger were American Communists who had evinced blind loyalty to Stalin even when other Leftists abandoned the party line when Stalin joined Hitler in dividing up Poland.
I will not dwell on this issue but the film begins by mocking the notion that Guthrie and Seeger were actual Communists, which they certainly were.
Knowing Guthrie's and Seeger's political sympathies adds a major dimension to the sense of betrayal they felt when Dylan decided to go his own way rather than be confined by the ideology (and musicology) of the Left.
(An excellent discussion of how Guthrie and Seeger were drawn into and became leaders in the push to create a Communist folk art movement is
here.)
Other random observations:
Norton's portrayal of Seeger is amazingly close to Seeger, whose work I am very familiar with.
The woman who plays Joan Baez does not sound like her at all. Admittedly, Joan Baez has a very distinctive voice, but I have read a number of reviews that celebrate the actress for her singing. I don't see it.
Dylan comes off as the jerk that the Joan Baez character accuses him of being. Seeger and Baez wanted to use him to their own ends (though I do believe Baez loved him), but it is clear that Dylan consciously looked around him to absorb the vibes that allowed him to write songs that would open doors for him, which he happily and eagerly rushed right through--up to a point.
Chalomet does a very good job of singing Dylan. I too saw the film as a concert film, and on that level I enjoyed it very much.
That said, if someone were just interested in Dylan, the documentary I mentioned earlier in the thread--No Direction Home (2005) by Sorcese--is magnificent.